TUKARAM KAUTIK MARATHE PATIL VIJAY BHALERAO vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THROUGH COLLECTOR, JALGAON — CA/4598/2026
Case under Land Acquisition Act - Appeal Section 173. Disposed: Contested--Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute on 05th May 2026.
CNR: HCBM030125882026
e-Filing Number
22-03-2026
Filing Number
CA/9410/2026
Filing Date
27-03-2026
Registration No
CA/4598/2026
Registration Date
18-04-2026
Judge
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SHAILESH P. BRAHME
Coram
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SHAILESH P. BRAHME
Bench Type
Single
Judicial Branch
Civil
Decision Date
05th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
TUKARAM KAUTIK MARATHE PATIL VIJAY BHALERAO
Respondent(s)
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THROUGH COLLECTOR, JALGAON
THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER NO 1 UPPAR TAPI PROJECT HATNUR JALGAON
TAPI IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, JALGAON THROUGH THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MIW DIVISION JALGAO
Hearing History
Judge: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SHAILESH P. BRAHME
URGENT ORDERS (CIVIL)
FOR ORDERS
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 22-04-2026 | URGENT ORDERS (CIVIL) |
| 05-05-2026 | FOR ORDERS |
Orders
The High Court of Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) issued a "speaking to minutes" order correcting its previous judgment dated 05.05.2026 in multiple consolidated land acquisition cases related to the TAPI irrigation project. The court added clarifications that it had previously permitted legal heirs of deceased claimants to be substituted as parties, but this permission was inadvertently omitted from the written order. The court formally incorporated provisions allowing heirs of deceased claimants Prakash Patil and Dashrath Paradhi to be brought on record, set aside any abatement, and directed the corrected order to be uploaded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The High Court of Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) issued a "speaking to minutes" order correcting its previous judgment dated 05.05.2026 in multiple consolidated land acquisition cases related to the TAPI irrigation project. The court added clarifications that it had previously permitted legal heirs of deceased claimants to be substituted as parties, but this permission was inadvertently omitted from the written order. The court formally incorporated provisions allowing heirs of deceased claimants Prakash Patil and Dashrath Paradhi to be brought on record, set aside any abatement, and directed the corrected order to be uploaded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts